Normally, decisions that are controversial don't stick in my craw too much even when I disagree with them. It's part of the human element to the sport, and it's bound to happen. Also, there is typically a solid case to be made for either fighter in fights like Sherk/Dunham, but sometimes it's just blatantly obvious that judges have their head in the clouds.

Evan Dunham won that fight, no doubt about it. The first round definitely went to Sherk, but only because of the outstanding submission defense and the damage he inflicted from the top. From there on out, I had it all Evan Dunham. Now, I also am not taking anything away from Sherk. Considering the long layoff, Sherk looked as tough as ever in my opinion, but I still think he lost that fight.

That fight is the perfect example of why saying "don't let it go to the judges decision" is just plain ridiculous. Dunham hit Sherk with everything but the kitchen sink and there was no way he could finish the guy. This is why we have judges, and they are supposed to be able to accurately judge some of the most simple observations in this sport.

This is also another reason why I am not a fan of 3 round fights. Fights should all be at least 5 rounds, with Championship fights being 7 rounds. I wouldn't even care if they shortened the length of the rounds to do it (though I don't think they need to) , but 3 round fights are part of the problem with some of these crappy decisions in my opinion.

Normally, decisions that are controversial don't stick in my craw too much even when I disagree with them. It's part of the human element to the sport, and it's bound to happen. Also, there is typically a solid case to be made for either fighter in fights like Sherk/Dunham, but sometimes it's just blatantly obvious that judges have their head in the clouds.

Evan Dunham won that fight, no doubt about it. The first round definitely went to Sherk, but only because of the outstanding submission defense and the damage he inflicted from the top. From there on out, I had it all Evan Dunham. Now, I also am not taking anything away from Sherk. Considering the long layoff, Sherk looked as tough as ever in my opinion, but I still think he lost that fight.

That fight is the perfect example of why saying "don't let it go to the judges decision" is just plain ridiculous. Dunham hit Sherk with everything but the kitchen sink and there was no way he could finish the guy. This is why we have judges, and they are supposed to be able to accurately judge some of the most simple observations in this sport.

This is also another reason why I am not a fan of 3 round fights. Fights should all be at least 5 rounds, with Championship fights being 7 rounds. I wouldn't even care if they shortened the length of the rounds to do it (though I don't think they need to) , but 3 round fights are part of the problem with some of these crappy decisions in my opinion.

Agreed. Extending the amount of rounds in a fight would be a good idea too. Wish they'd do it.

We should make it like a video game and at the end you cash in your points for money. Big points for a slam. Double for a KO. You get points for submission attempts but also get them for defending one. And you lose points for running backwards, turtling, nipple tweaking, or crying while still in the octagon.

We should make it like a video game and at the end you cash in your points for money. Big points for a slam. Double for a KO. You get points for submission attempts but also get them for defending one. And you lose points for running backwards, turtling, nipple tweaking, or crying while still in the octagon.